1 Tuesday, 11th January 2000. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving and Mr Rampton, I am conscious that 3this court is not capable of accommodating all who would 4like to be here. 5MR RAMPTON: Including counsel, my Lord! 6THE CHAIRMAN: Including counsel -- you have rather more space 7than some of the people at the back. All I can say is 8that we have done our best to find a court that can 9accommodate the technology and is physically big enough to 10cope with all the bundles. 11 I would like to be able to say that we could try 12to find another court where everybody could be found a 13place to sit down, but I just do not think it is 14possible. I will make enquiries, but it is very desirable 15that everybody who wants to be here should be here and 16I am afraid they are not. So I will make enquiries, but 17I think we will probably have to stay here, so I hope 18everyone will put up with the discomfort and I am sorry 19about it. 20 Mr Irving, I have a copy of your opening 21 statement. Are there any other preliminary matters that 22need to be discussed and decided before you embark on it? 23MR IRVING: My Lord, I did address a letter to you within the 24last few days recommending that before I embark on my 25opening statement, with your Lordship's permission, we 26address one or two procedural matters ----

. P-2

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I thought there might be. 2MR IRVING: --- covering the opening phase and also how, with 3the agreement of the Defendants, we propose to structure 4the hearing of this action. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 6MR IRVING: The most interesting part of the action in the 7light of history is, undoubtedly, the Holocaust and 8Auschwitz and is also, I think we all apprehend, the most 9complicated to prepare. By agreement between the parties, 10we propose to divide the action into these two phases, but 11basically all the rest followed by Auschwitz, if I have 12understood the proposals also made by the Defendants in 13this connection? 14MR RAMPTON: I think that is a misunderstanding. I had 15supposed that we were going to do Auschwitz first, and if 16that causes Mr Irving a difficulty -- I am not saying 17whose fault the understanding is, but misunderstanding, 18however, it undoubtedly is -- we have scheduled our 19Auschwitz expert, Professor van Pelt, it to be here for 20the last week in January which is about when I expected to 21start my cross-examination. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: So what is being proposed, that the whole 23case should be divided, as it were, into two? 24MR RAMPTON: No, I do not think so -- well, in two, yes. What 25is proposed by us (and which Mr Irving has agreed to, 26though it appears there is a misunderstanding about the

. P-3

1timing of it) was that Auschwitz should be dealt with as a 2discrete or separate topic. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: With the Claimant's evidence and then the 4Defendants' evidence. 5MR RAMPTON: The Claimant gives his evidence, I would then 6cross-examine him and immediately following that or his 7own re-examination, I would call the Auschwitz expert for 8the Defence, Professor van Pelt, who can be cross-examined 9by Mr Irving. 10 I had expected that process to start at the end 11of this month. From what Mr Irving has just said, it now 12appears that he has thought that Auschwitz would come at 13the end of the case which is contrary to my 14understanding. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am a bit surprised that there should be 16such a fundamental disagreement. 17MR RAMPTON: I hear it now for the first time with surprise. 18I utter no word or criticism or blame. I do not know how 19it comes about. It may be that I should have when I have 20found out what has happened. But it is extremely 21inconvenient from our expert's point of view and he is not 22resident in this country. He is in Canada. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: On the other hand, Mr Irving must really be 24free as Claimant to take his own course, unless agreement 25can be reached to some other effect. 26MR RAMPTON: I do not know there is much to be gained by having

. P-4

1a discussion about that particular topic in front of your 2Lordship now. It seems to me we have to go back to the 3drawing board and work out a schedule which suits both 4sides. But, as matters presently stand, it would cause us 5a great deal of difficulty as we thought we had an 6agreement that we could start that topic first, but there 7it is. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I think it is right that we do 9want to spend time discussing this in open court unless 10and until it proves to be necessary. Do you agree with 11that? 12MR IRVING: I agree, my Lord, except that I would remark that 13I received on Friday evening after close of business about 146,000 pages of document relating to van Pelt's evidence, 15though I am surprised that they would imagine they could 16launch straight into the preparation of the Auschwitz 17section of the hearing without not giving us time to 18examine each and every one of these documents and have 19them examined. 20 On the other hand, I agree, we do not have to 21discuss it in open court. I am perfectly prepared to have 22Professor van Pelt come over in the middle of whatever 23else is going on and we can take him as a separate 24entirety. He is certainly an extremely interesting 25witness to be heard. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: